Bizarre reasoning

Mar. 6th, 2009 at 1:54 PM

Regarding our great leader's encounter with a pot of green custard this morning, John Prescott said that "it was 'totally unacceptable' that Ms Deen had been able to walk away after the incident without being arrested, arguing that she could have been carrying acid rather than custard." (BBC website)

So she should have been arrested for possibly carrying acid rather than actualling damaging Mandy's coat? How does that work?

Comments

( 7 comments — Leave a comment )

pond823

Mar. 6th, 2009 02:03 pm (UTC)

Thought crime, it's the new terriorism.

Link | Reply | Thread

davidt3001

Mar. 6th, 2009 03:22 pm (UTC)

Well, had she thrown acid at the flambouyant, improper loan-accepting, back-stabbing, truth distorting fuck up, she wouldn't have been allowed to walk away, would she?

Mandy's special branch shadows would have shot her, or at least maced her ...

Link | Reply | Thread

cleanskies

Mar. 6th, 2009 03:26 pm (UTC)

I don't know, I think Prescott sounds a bit peeved that it wasn't acid...

Link | Reply | Thread

kruku

Mar. 6th, 2009 06:33 pm (UTC)

Mr Prescott should be aware that Ms Deen is representing the will of the people; Mandy is very bland. He obviously requires 'bizarre seasoning'.

Link | Reply | Thread

fractalgeek

Mar. 7th, 2009 12:06 am (UTC)

I'd just like to say that a few years ago, when he was better known as "The Fat Controller", I had to halt myself abruptly as said Mr Prescott walked straight through in front of me, on a pavement opposite parliment. Of course, if I had realised who it was before stopping...

Link | Reply | Thread